The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-01-10
RECORD OF THE COURTS.
Supreme Court.
Supreme Court.
Hon. Byron X. Elliott. ief-justice.
The following opinions were rendered Jan s:

Hon. Byron X. Elliott, Chief-justce
The following opinions were rendered Jan S:
PRAcTIoE-TAx LIEN-NoTIcE.
12545 Omer L. Ludlow. guardian, Vs. Ed
ward s. Ludlow ct al. Dearborn c. G. AZ
frmed. Howk, Jan assignment of error
must be upon the complaint cross-complaint
as an entirety, and not upon the separate para
graphs thereof. IT, When, in suit to fore
close mortgage, cross complainant alleged
that he was the owner of the mortgaged prop
erty under tax deed pursuant to a tax sale of
the property which antedated the date of plant
lffs mortgage thereon, and that the plaintiff and
MS co-defendants each claimed inter-
est in such property, which was adverse
to his title, the cross-complaint is good.
t3l An answer to such cross com plant alleged
that the cross com planant had foreclosed
mortgage on eighty six acres of land belonging
to plaintiffs mortgageor; that on the day he re-
celved sherffs deed, taxes amounting to 5000
were lien upon such real estate; that, to avoid
the payment of the taxlien, the cross-complain-
ant caused the county treasurer to sell the land
described in plaintiffs complaint: that his mort
gage was gwen TO secure, etc. The answer is
insufficient The lien of the State for all of the
mortgageor's taxes, without regard to what prop
erty belonging to him they were assessed on,
was transferred to the crosscomplainant as pur-
chaser. If his tax-deed prove Intellectual With
constructive notice appellant took his mortgage.
CONDENSATION PROCEEDINGS DESCRIPTION
COLLATERAL ATTACK.
1896. st. Joseph Hydraulic Company vs.. c.,
w. & NJ Railway Company. Ellkart c. G.
Affirmed Elliott J-When in a condemnation
proceeding there is some description of the land,
and 1t was sufficient to indicate to the owner
what the railroad company desired to appro-
pirate, the owner cannot, after having appeared
In such proceedings and making no objections to
the description, maintain action to recover
the land.
PRIVILEGED oMMUNICATIoNs-sPECIAL JUDGE
1887 Gabriel Bertman VS.. Ezekiel Hopkins
Daviess G. C. Affirmed. collars. J-Suit to set
aside fraudulent conveyance by creditors Ne
EQUATIONS between husband and wife whereby
the husband was to convey to the wife property
in satisfaction Of his debts to her. are not priti-
legged communications. I'll failure of the
special Judge to sign the record of the final judg
ment within the term does not render the judg-
ment void. At most it is an lrregularity. Under
Section 4lo such judge had the authority to pass
upon motion to redocket made at a subse-
quent term, and to sign the record then.
RECESSION EQUITY.
12S89 George Sims ct al vs. Ellis Bark.
Montgomery c. G. Reversed Mitchell, Jap
pellee was induced to make a warranty deed to
six acres of land he did not own upon the faith
that the vendee would pay the remaining pur-
chase price to the owner. The failure of the
vendee to do so is not his fault, and ne is clearly
entitled to rescission of the contract The
court. as one of equity, had all the parties before
1t and the controversies between them should
have been completely determined.
1898. Central Union Telephone Company
vs. Board etc. Tippecanoe G. G. Dismissed